Where is John the Apostle now?

[Dino246]

There a new one every week. It looks like this is the one.

 

[Dino246]

Methuselah wasn't worthy of salvation from the flood?

It has nothing to do with his worthiness; he died before the flood, not in it.

The name "Methuselah" literally means "when he dies, it shall break forth".

Methuselah has the longest age recorded in Scripture, which together with his name's meaning tells us of God's extreme patience when dealing with sin.

 

[Locoponydirtman]

That's true that it brings it into question, but it isn't proof because you haven't produced John and let him give his own reason for why he hasn't been heard from.

but didn't the apostles openly oppose the Pharisees, preaching the gospel daily in the temple?
just because Judaism had lost the path didn't make them all just keep quiet and hidden forever.
so why would John have given up?

which is why i guess you suppose he's been locked in a cell under the Vatican since 200AD...?

Except vatican didnt exist that far back. It was just a ain next to the Tiber. That land was donates by Pepin in 754 and added to by Charlemagne in 774 but only became a state unto its own in 1177 Saint Peters Basilica was built between 1506 and 1626. So keeping John there would habe to be post the reformation and I think Luther and Calvin amd many reformers would have opposed imprisoning John.

 

[DanielJosephBoucher]

So John was never told he wasn't going to die and we can infer, that he was not told that he would tarry until Christ came again because the statement: If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Is written as a "third class" conditional statement. A third class condition is to be understood in the negative. That is, Christ did not will. If Christ had meant it to be understood in the positive, then it would have been written as a "first class" conditional statement and could be translated as "since" instead of "if".

I'm surprised that so many of you interpret it this way, that Jesus was merely stating the possibility of John being kept alive until His second coming. You have the right to your own opinions, but I think you're reading into the whole use of the word "if" too much. To me, Jesus told Peter in plain language what he was going to do with John because He loved him so much.

 

[Dino246]

Meditating on Scriptures is what all the religious men and women do. Just because I am a lay person, it doesn't mean I can't do the same. It is in plain language. Thanks for your concern, though. It's good to not go wild with the Scriptures as some people do. This just dawned on me some years ago. I thought I would share it here to see what everyone else thinks. I'm not surprised that some don't believe it's true.

 

[Locoponydirtman]

I'm surprised that so many of you interpret it this way, that Jesus was merely stating the possibility of John being kept alive until His second coming. You have the right to your own opinions, but I think you're reading into the whole use of the word "if" too much. To me, Jesus told Peter in plain language what he was going to do with John because He loved him so much.

"If" is a qualifying word. The whole context of the sentence hang on the word "if". That is always true of every statement that includes the word "if".
Basically Jesus was making an idiomatic statement equivolent to, its none of your business. Then there is the foĺlow up to where it is clarified.
"Jesus did not say that he would not die".

 

[DanielJosephBoucher]

"If" is a qualifying word. The whole context of the sentence hang on the word "if". That is always true of every statement that includes the word "if".
Basically Jesus was making an idiomatic statement equivolent to, its none of your business. Then there is the foĺlow up to where it is clarified.
"Jesus did not say that he would not die".

Well, Matthew 24.34 and John 21.22 both depict the same thing, that Jesus is keeping John alive until His second coming. With two places like that in Scriptures, it confirms that it is His intention to keep John alive.

 

[awelight]

I'm surprised that so many of you interpret it this way, that Jesus was merely stating the possibility of John being kept alive until His second coming. You have the right to your own opinions, but I think you're reading into the whole use of the word "if" too much. To me, Jesus told Peter in plain language what he was going to do with John because He loved him so much.

The problem here is this: (Your comments in blue)

I'm surprised that so many of you interpret it this way, that Jesus was merely stating the possibility of John being kept alive until His second coming.

So many believe this because we believe the Scripture evidence. It is what the Scripture says. It is the grammatically correct way to understand these verses and understanding the words, as written in the Kione Greek, is how one comes to the Truth - with the assistance of the Holy Spirit who guides us into that Truth. One can also come to the Truth with a good translation but it is still better to work in the language of the original autographs.

You have the right to your own opinions, but I think you're reading into the whole use of the word "if" too much.

My opinion is irrelevant - if not based on the proper Grammar and Hermeneutics and thus, provable by Scripture.

To me, Jesus told Peter in plain language what he was going to do with John because He loved him so much

And here is the problem - You said "To me"... If one is not willing to conform their understanding of the Truth when presented with the evidence - Then that one is not teachable and will most likely be susceptible to many false doctrines.

 

[Dino246]

Well, Matthew 24.34 and John 21.22 both depict the same thing, that Jesus is keeping John alive until His second coming. With two places like that in Scriptures, it confirms that it is His intention to keep John alive.

Matthew 24 is not talking about John. The passage in Matthew 24 is echoed in Mark 13 and Luke 21.

 

[ChristsChild]

So have established that John still lives?

 

[Dino246]

So have established that John still lives?

In his eternal state, yes. In his earthly state, quite the contrary.

 

[DanielJosephBoucher]

Mark 13.30 and Luke21.32 do indeed echo Matthew 24.34, so it shows consistency through the Gospels that He is keeping someone, at least, alive until He returns. John 21.22 simply clarifies one person He referred to when He said, "this generation," in the other three Gospels. John is one of the generation He was referring to. These passages connect and show His plan for John.

 

[DanielJosephBoucher]

The problem here is this: (Your comments in blue)

I'm surprised that so many of you interpret it this way, that Jesus was merely stating the possibility of John being kept alive until His second coming.

So many believe this because we believe the Scripture evidence. It is what the Scripture says. It is the grammatically correct way to understand these verses and understanding the words, as written in the Kione Greek, is how one comes to the Truth - with the assistance of the Holy Spirit who guides us into that Truth. One can also come to the Truth with a good translation but it is still better to work in the language of the original autographs.

You have the right to your own opinions, but I think you're reading into the whole use of the word "if" too much.

My opinion is irrelevant - if not based on the proper Grammar and Hermeneutics and thus, provable by Scripture.

To me, Jesus told Peter in plain language what he was going to do with John because He loved him so much

And here is the problem - You said "To me"... If one is not willing to conform their understanding of the Truth when presented with the evidence - Then that one is not teachable and will most likely be susceptible to many false doctrines.

So, you are the ones that are not teachable, then? Because I have been expounding the truth to you all.

 

[Dino246]

So, you are the ones that are not teachable, then? Because I have been expounding the truth to you all.

Hogwash and codswollop. You've been expounding your own wacky misinterpretations of Scripture which are based on poor reading skills and inadequate understanding of English grammar.

 

[awelight]

So, you are the ones that are not teachable, then? Because I have been expounding the truth to you all.

Then prove it by the Scriptures. As I said earlier... your subjective opinion does not matter if it cannot be backed-up by objective Truth.

But I for one, do not intend to argue this in a continuous circle.

 

[awelight]

Well, Matthew 24.34 and John 21.22 both depict the same thing, that Jesus is keeping John alive until His second coming. With two places like that in Scriptures, it confirms that it is His intention to keep John alive.

Again, you are misunderstanding the Scriptures.

In Matthew 24:34 - Our Lords statement about "this generation" has to do with the Parable of the fig tree, which it is embedded within.

Mat 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
Mat 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

The Lord is saying, you will know when the end is near fore the signs are likened to a fig tree ready to bud. Verses 32 and 33. The signs are found in the entire chapter of Matthew 24.

Thus, when you see these signs, like a fig tree about to bud new leaves - then THIS generation - the generation seeing the signs, will not pass away. That generation, will live to see the end days.

 

[DanielJosephBoucher]

Call it what you will, I can handle it. It just makes sense to me that Jesus meant that He is keeping John alive until His second coming. For those of you who don't believe, it gives you something to think about, at least.

 

[DanielJosephBoucher]

Again, you are misunderstanding the Scriptures

Thus, when you see these signs, like a fig tree about to bud new leaves - then THIS generation - the generation seeing the signs, will not pass away. That generation, will live to see the end days.

I don't see it that way. I see it as Jesus was telling the people of the generation that He spoke those words to to watch for those signs because when they finally see those signs, then the time of His second coming will be at hand. Of course, because the Evangelists put His words into the Gospels, future generations after that generation should all watch for those signs, as well.

 

[awelight]

Call it what you will, I can handle it. It just makes sense to me that Jesus meant that He is keeping John alive until His second coming. For those of you who don't believe, it gives you something to think about, at least.

Questions: For what purpose would Christ keep the Apostle John alive? How would this be out of Love? How would living for thousands of years be a blessing in this sinful flesh?

Php 1:21 For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.
Php 1:22 But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not.
Php 1:23 For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better:

 

[Dino246]

Call it what you will, I can handle it. It just makes sense to me that Jesus meant that He is keeping John alive until His second coming. For those of you who don't believe, it gives you something to think about, at least.

What you may not know (and what many Christians don't accept) is that the signs of which Jesus spoke were fulfilled within a generation (about 40 years) of the day He spoke them (read Josephus' Wars of the Jews).

Many people don't accept that because the signs that did appear don't match their interpretation of His words. The same thing happened with the prophecy regarding "the Elijah who was to come". According to Jesus, John the baptizer fulfilled that prophecy, but even John himself, when asked by the Pharisees, rightly denied that he was Elijah.